Luis Herrera-In Mexico, high acidity in the soil due to minerals like aluminum makes it impossible for maize to thrive. It grows to only a fraction of its normal height and the stocks produced are small and unhealthy. One scientist, Luis Herrera set out to change this. Herrera genetically engineered maize to produce a natural chemical called citrate, which binds to aluminum. The citrate released by the plant would bind to the aluminum in the soil, keeping it there and preventing it from entering the plant. As this GM maize thrived in Mexico, Greenpeace grew concerned and stepped in. They claimed that GMO’s were unsafe and that Herrera was tampering with the environment. Under tremendous pressure form the environmental group, the Mexican government ordered Herrera to stop his research.

Cornell University- Cornell has been a site of great development in the biotech industry. One of the first successful GM foods, the GM papaya was developed by researchers at Cornell working with Hawaiian papaya farmers. In addition, the gene gun or biolistic method of gene insertion was also developed at Cornell. This technology was originally created by John Sanford in 1987 at Cornell. The school of agriculture is still very strong at this research university.

Florence Wambugu, a Kenyan scientist, was recruited by
Monsanto to develop a GM sweet potato which could resist the feathering mottle
virus and grow to larger dimensions. Working closely with scientists at
Monsanto, she spliced the gene for feathering mottle-resistance into sweet
potatoes. In field trials, the transgenic sweet potato grew to several times
the size of the unmodified sweet potato. This GM crop could quadruple the
productivity of Kenyan framers. Best of all, the technology is built into the
seed, and can be recycled year after year, meaning that farmers do not need
continually buy pesticides and herbicides. This breakthrough could allow for
farmers to feed the growing Kenyan population and break the cycle of poverty. It
would also affect subsequent generations, as children of farmers could go to
school instead of laboring in the fields day after day.

Initially,
environmental groups spoke out against the practice, claiming that there was
enough food for the entire world, and that we should focus on distributing it
equally. Wambugu countered by saying that even if industrialized nations gave
away food to developing counties, the costs of transportation would force
Kenyans to pay high prices at the markets. She added that no one wanted to be
dependent on others, and that farmers took pride in being able to feed their
families.